Please Share:

Senator Christopher J. Connors, Assemblyman Brian E. Rumpf and Assemblywoman DiAnne C. Gove released the following statement in light of today’s signing of A-4674/S-3106, legislation known as the “Cory Booker Bill.”

District 9 lawmakers comment on the Nov. 1, 2018 signing of legislation known as the Booker Bill, stating that US Sen. Cory Booker should pick one office to run for and stop wasting taxpayers’ time and money. (SenateNJ.com)

“Dismissive of more severe issues that taxpayers want addressed, the State Legislature and the Governor saw fit to prioritize a bill that would allow a candidate to run for both Congress and for Vice President or President simultaneously. Obviously, the bill was written for New Jersey’s sitting US Senator, Cory Booker.

“The bill’s introduction and the uncharacteristic-for-Trenton speed with which it was enacted speaks volumes about the Trenton establishment’s priorities these days. Usually, only tax increases move that quickly though the Legislature to be signed into, as evidenced by the recent State Budget process. Now you can add rigging the system of the people, by the people, for the people — for one person, to the type of bills that meet the criteria of being important – at least as far as the Legislative Leadership is concerned.

“This is Trenton: Slow on reform or tax relief, but quick on tax increases and securing political advantages for the few.

“If the best interests of the people are truly are to be served, shouldn’t a candidate have a moral and legal responsibility to choose one office to run for? Do you think if a Senator Booker was a Republican that the Democratic-controlled State Legislature would move on this bill at all, let alone so quickly?

“There is another power play in the works here: If Senator Booker were to be elected President or Vice President after running for both offices at the same time in 2020, Governor Murphy would get to appoint a new U.S. Senator.

“Not coincidentally, this proposed legal advantage is tailor-made to meet the political aspirations of a former Newark mayor. As with so many state issues, it circles back to Newark, most especially when political advancement is at stake. Newark holds a special standing in the state as the consistent beneficiary of special treatment including, but not limited to, windfalls for state school and municipal aid, courtesy of taxpayers from across the state.

“Sadly, the Booker Bill is yet another in a long string of state policies that blatantly cater to the urban areas of the state, in this case Newark. To that end, each member of our Delegation voted against the bill when it was presented on the floor of our respective Houses for a final Chamber vote on October 29 of this year.”